Julian Assange: rapist or not?

[Here_to_learn]

According to this look at the same document:

You really have to explain to me how that document support the subject of that blog post.

I'll have to look into the details a tad more before I agree the inserted herself can be dismissed. You can take a quote out of context and miss some of the details.

Yes do look into it. Maybe it would have been prudent to do that before you asserted that a person had acted wrongly, but I look forward to the results if your investigation.


And one more thing - using the words "a swedish polititian" instead of "the womens counsel" is an interesting choice of words, isn't it?

 

[Jaxe]

Yes, exactly what I quoted above - Claes Borgström (as counsel for the two women) appealed the earlier decision not to continue the investigation. And as I have shown, the Gothenburg development center is the designation recipient for that appeal, and she is the senior prosecutor there.

If you would expect anything else to happen if a counsel appeals on a sex case, please describe that.

You're skimming the truth, Borgström asked her, directly, and he did not do it on request of the two women.

I've mentioned it before, so i'm not going to rant on about it, but it doesn't take much research to find out what the problem is with regarding Ny and Borgström as in any way impartial or objective on this matter.

 

[Jaxe]

And one more thing - using the words "a swedish polititian" instead of "the womens counsel" is an interesting choice of words, isn't it?

When you consider that the request wasn't done in his role as their counsel (that would in fact have gone against their wishes), it is not that strange. I do agree that it is an interesting choice of words though, but probably not for the same reason as you, had he been identified by person, people who have some clue about who he actually is would be quick to assume something else is going on.

 

[Here_to_learn]

You're skimming the truth, Borgström asked her, directly, and he did not do it on request of the two women.

What sources do you have for that? It's not in the agreed facts that has been linked before.

Instead, the agreed facts specifically state that it was the counsel that appealed:

Meanwhile, on 27th August 2010, the counsel for SW and AA appealedthe Chief Prosecutor’s decision to a Senior Prosecutor in Goteborg.

(Page 4).

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Yes, exactly what I quoted above - Claes Borgström (as counsel for the two women) appealed the earlier decision not to continue the investigation. And as I have shown, the Gothenburg development center is the designation recipient for that appeal, and she is the senior prosecutor there.

If you would expect anything else to happen if a counsel appeals on a sex case, please describe that.

According to this site:

There are some 900 prosecutors at 39 public prosecution offices all over the country.

If there was evidence Ny would have been assigned a similar case I might change positions on Ny. If the Director of Prosecution is in the habit of taking minor rape cases, one has to wonder what duties a director has. The head of a prosecution team with a similar case load as the members is one thing, the head of a large legal department is quite another.

So how many cases does the director normally carry and was it randomly assigned to her because it was her turn?

Claes Borgström contacting Ny could be the reason Ny 'inserted herself' as opposed to simply having Claes Borgström file the case and it was Ny's turn. So which is it?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

appealed the Chief Prosecutor’s decision to a Senior Prosecutor in Goteborg...

Again, was Ny personally contacted or were papers simply filed? There is a difference. What you are saying goes to Ny's motive, but does not necessarily negate "inserted" herself.


I just realized how Freudian the terminology is here.

 

[Here_to_learn]

According to this site:If there was evidence Ny would have been assigned a similar case I might change positions on Ny. If the Director of Prosecution is in the habit of taking minor rape cases, one has to wonder what duties a director has. The head of a prosecution team with a similar case load as the members is one thing, the head of a large legal department is quite another.

So how many cases does the director normally carry and was it randomly assigned to her because it was her turn?

Claes Borgström contacting Ny could be the reason Ny 'inserted herself' as opposed to simply having Claes Borgström file the case and it was Ny's turn. So which is it?

First of all, the situation is an appeal, and Nys groups is specifically responsible for handling appeals on sex crimes, so you linking to the fact about 900 prosecutors is just trying to ignore facts. 900 prosecutors is not relevant in an appeal situation.

You are claiming that she has been acting improperly - now do your homework and back that up.

And regarding CB contacting MN, instead of that he as counsel appealed to her group - again do back that up with well sourced facts.

Or do you dismiss the "agreed facts" document that both Sweden and JAs legal teams has agreed on and signed?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

....
Yes do look into it. Maybe it would have been prudent to do that before you asserted that a person had acted wrongly, but I look forward to the results if your investigation.

As should you before you assume I didn't.

You are rehashing a discussion adding a new element. If you go back to the beginning pages of this thread you'll find the issue was thoroughly examined.

....And one more thing - using the words "a swedish polititian" instead of "the womens counsel" is an interesting choice of words, isn't it?

Political motive for Ny was proposed by many people looking at the case. It should not be surprising that Wikileaks folks think there is more politics here than non-consensual sex.

 

[Here_to_learn]

but does not necessarily negate "inserted" herself.

And if so, was the insertion consensual or not?



(Sorry, but I will claim that you started it!)

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

And if so, was the insertion consensual or not?



(Sorry, but I will claim that you started it!)

Given this contentious 30 page thread as an example, I'd say apparently not.

 

[Here_to_learn]

You are rehashing a discussion adding a new element.

Yes, sourced facts. It can be a bitch...

If you go back to the beginning pages of this thread you'll find the issue was thoroughly examined.

I'd be happy just to get a source for the statement that CB was not acting as counsel, and as such that he did not appeal the earlier decision. But it would have to be a pretty solid source to contradict the agreed facts document.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Yes, sourced facts. It can be a bitch...
I'd be happy just to get a source for the statement that CB was not acting as counsel, and as such that he did not appeal the earlier decision. But it would have to be a pretty solid source to contradict the agreed facts document.

Are you claiming there were no valid sources cited in the discussion until you posted one?

As for contradicting agreed facts, you have not addressed the issue I had with how you interpret those said facts. So let's see if you still can:

First of all, the situation is an appeal, and Nys groups is specifically responsible for handling appeals on sex crimes, so you linking to the fact about 900 prosecutors is just trying to ignore facts. 900 prosecutors is not relevant in an appeal situation.

This is a straw man side track. Given those 900 prosecutors are in 39 offices, it should have been obvious I was not saying Ny was the department head over 900 prosecutors.

You are claiming that she has been acting improperly - now do your homework and back that up.

And regarding CB contacting MN, instead of that he as counsel appealed to her group - again do back that up with well sourced facts.

Or do you dismiss the "agreed facts" document that both Sweden and JAs legal teams has agreed on and signed?

You seem to be missing the point. I'm asking you to clarify your claims. I'm not making new claims (yet).

Fact: Ny is a department director.
Fact: 39 offices have 900 prosecutors between them.

That suggests departments are large and a department director would have too many responsibilities to take very many (if any) cases personally, let alone a "minor rape" case.

I asked you, how many prosecutors work in the department Ny is director of? I thought you knew and I was trying to save Google time.

If it was 'routine' for Ny to be assigned this case, that supports your claim. If it was unusual for Ny to have taken this case and it would have normally been 'assigned' to someone under her in the department that Ny is the director of, then that supports my interpretation.


Also: If CB asked Ny to take the case, that is political. If the papers were filed and CB had no personal contact with Ny, that suggests routine procedure.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Also, it matters how Claes Borgstrom became the attorney for this case. It doesn't sound like the two women contacted him. It sounds like he contacted them. How this happened is key to the question of malicious political prosecution.

On the other side of the coin, he seems like a man on a gender issue mission and he could easily just be attracted to this case because it is high profile and meets his political agenda needs, irrespective of the Wikileaks troubles with the US government.

From Wiki on the guy:

He has worked on several high-profile criminal cases, most notably as a defence counsel for convicted mass murderer Thomas Quick.[2] As Thomas Quick's attorney, it was questioned whether he had neglected to protect his mentally disturbed client's objective interests in being judged not guilty.[3]

Since the Thomas Quick portfolio of cases were reopened and Quick has been acquitted in the first retrial and evidence proven to be incorrect in other cases, Borgströms career track record has increasingly been questioned.

Between 2000 and 2007, Borgström was appointed by the Swedish government as the Equality Ombudsman (JämO).[1]

In 2007 he quit to start a law firm with former Social Democratic Minister for Justice Thomas Bodström as partner.[4]

Since 2008 he is also the Swedish Social Democratic Party's spokesperson on gender equality issues.[5]

Borgström has often attracted attention with a series of controversial proposals and moves. He claims that all men carry a collective guilt for violence against women, and has in this context supported Gudrun Schyman's "Tax on Men".[6]

He also attracted attention in March 2006 when he demanded that Sweden boycott the 2006 World Cup in Germany "in protest against the increase in the trafficking in women that the event is expected to result in".[7]

That's quite a history of chasing high profile cases.

 

[BenBurch]

This presumes a malicious prosecution is not a possible occurrence.

Nonsense.

It assumes that if there is a malicious prosecution, and if that prosecution is at odds with Sweden's laws, then Sweden's laws will deal with it.

If they allow or encourage malicious prosecution, then sucks to be Assange.

In either case it's not up to you or me to criticize Sweden.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You are making the presumption Ben, the law and the courts are incorruptible. But that is not a supportable position.

And it's another straw man claiming I'm criticizing "Sweden". I've only criticized this case and the people involved in it. Claiming that is criticizing an entire country is absurd.

 

[alex04]

You enter another country, you become subject to their laws.

He entered Sweden with open eyes.

Not Sweden's fault if you don't like the laws. Their right to have them.

Sure, largely agree.

I'm simply saying that it's not right and just that someone is imprisoned without charge and (as far as I'm aware) in many cases denied communication during this time.

If they allow or encourage malicious prosecution, then sucks to be Assange.

As the laws of asylum take precedent over extradition laws, it sucks to be Sweden at the moment.

 

[Darth Rotor]

If only Amanda Knox could visit Sweden, we could really get a long and entertaining thread. Last I heard, cartwheels are not illegal for Americans in Sweden, though I am not sure if the treaties with Australia are as lenient.

If this fella AssHinge gets to Ecuador, would that not render the whole thing moot, or would Sweden pursue extradition with those folks as well?

 

[Silhouette]

Apparently, Swedish police will go to other countries to interview even murder suspects...
http://translate.google.de/translat...d-i-serbien-1701566.aspx#.T-tO934j_Nw.twitter

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

If only Amanda Knox could visit Sweden, we could really get a long and entertaining thread. Last I heard, cartwheels are not illegal for Americans in Sweden, though I am not sure if the treaties with Australia are as lenient.

If this fella AssHinge gets to Ecuador, would that not render the whole thing moot, or would Sweden pursue extradition with those folks as well?

Posting after a few beers, Darth?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Apparently, Swedish police will go to other countries to interview even murder suspects...
http://translate.google.de/translat...d-i-serbien-1701566.aspx#.T-tO934j_Nw.twitter

Bingo! Ding ding ding ding.

Or should I say, nice smoking gun, Sil.?